Preview — The Naked Ape
by Desmond Morris

The Naked Ape: A Zoologist's Study of the Human Animal

This work has become a benchmark of popular anthropology and psychology.

Zoologist Desmond Morris considers humans as being simply another animal species in this classic book first published in 1967. Here is the Naked Ape at his most primal in love, at work, at war. Meet man as he really is: relative to the apes, stripped of his veneer as we see him courting, making love, sThis work has become a benchmark of popular anthropology and psychology.

Zoologist Desmond Morris considers humans as being simply another animal species in this classic book first published in 1967. Here is the Naked Ape at his most primal in love, at work, at war. Meet man as he really is: relative to the apes, stripped of his veneer as we see him courting, making love, sleeping, socializing, grooming, playing. The Naked Ape takes its place alongside Darwin’s Origin of the Species, presenting man not as a fallen angel, but as a risen ape, remarkable in his resilience, energy and imagination, yet an animal nonetheless, in danger of forgetting his origins.

With its penetrating insights on mans beginnings, sex life, habits and our astonishing bonds to the animal kingdom, The Naked Ape is a landmark, at once provocative, compelling and timeless....more

Morris makes a great song and dance about the 'outrage' with which his book was first received. Why are people so resistant to contemplating, in the cool light of scientific 'objectivity', their 'animal nature', he asks. However, Morris' claim to neutrality is highly suspect; he urges us to learn from and accept the picture he presents of human beings, saying

homo sapiens has remained a naked ape... in acquiring lofty new motives, he has lost none of the earthy old ones. This is frequently a caus

Morris makes a great song and dance about the 'outrage' with which his book was first received. Why are people so resistant to contemplating, in the cool light of scientific 'objectivity', their 'animal nature', he asks. However, Morris' claim to neutrality is highly suspect; he urges us to learn from and accept the picture he presents of human beings, saying

homo sapiens has remained a naked ape... in acquiring lofty new motives, he has lost none of the earthy old ones. This is frequently a cause of embarrassment to him, but his old impulses have been with him for millions of years, his new ones only a few thousand at the most - and there is no hope of shrugging off the accumulated genetic legacy of his evolutionary past. He would be a far less worried and more fulfilled animal if he would face up to this fact

He contrasts the biological view with that of anthropologists, whose methods he treats with derision, since they have tended to give attention to exceptional, often fairly isolated societies. His comments on this subject are not encouraging.

The simple tribal groups that are living today are not primitive, they are stultified... the naked ape is essentially an exploratory species and any society that has failed to advance has in some sense failed

This amounts to a ringing endorsement for imperialist appropriation and hegemony. He compares such 'biological failures' with 'the ordinary successful members of the major cultures'.

As well as anthropologists, he has issues with psychologists who have, laudably(!) stuck to 'mainstream specimens' but these have unfortunately been 'aberrant or failed... in some respect' he quotes an unnamed practitioner from the field in question approvingly 'We have tackled the abnormals and we are only now beginning, a little late in the day, to concentrate on the normals'. Apparently this horrifically ableist language is unproblematic because we are dealing with the human animal as a mere meaty hunk of biological data here, not with personhood.

As usual, my heckles are raised by the use of the male pronoun for humans in general, and I usually try hard to make allowances for old-fashioned conventions here, but in this case 'he' is indicative of Morris' stance. His naked ape is a male and his lifestyle is characteristic of the species and shaped its evolution. He describes how males became hunters and thus developed sophisticated cooperative, communicative and planning skills. There must be something missing from this picture, as female humans have equally well-developed abilities in these areas and they are strictly excluded from hunting in Morris' account. Perhaps child-rearing, which they are credited with, made equal demands, but in that case why is hunting the primary influence rather than infantilism and childcare?

On the fascinating subject of how homo sapiens became hairless (I prefer this description to Morris' term 'naked' which he claims is neutral, but obviously connotes clothing), he outlines various theories. I'm most interested in the aquatic ape hypothesis, and keen to read about it next, but Morris favours a hunting-related hypothesis, which leaves the hairlessness of female humans unexplained. Morris' fondness for hunting is much in evidence, in the lack of mention afforded to the food gathering practices of our (probably mainly female) ancestors, description of carnivores vs omnivorous primates, his derision for vegetarians, and most importantly in his description of work as the direct modern analogue of hunting. Thus, women ought not to work/hunt; their 'biologically correct' place is at home caring for the young. All-male clubs and sporting activities are obvious extensions of the need to hunt. I'm grateful to Morris for thereby explaining why women have no interest in sports, athletic pursuits or group socialising activities.

This book apparently caused much offence with its 'frank' descriptions of sexual activity. Morris admits these are based on studies in North America, but claims this is fine because 'that culture' is 'biologically large and successful' and therefore 'representative of the naked ape' in general. Morris' account of intercourse is clinical and anyone hoping for stimulation had much better check out the erotica section. Most novels are far sexier (and infinitely more enjoyable on every other level too). What offends me is his unabashedly homophobic stance. He explains homosexual behaviour, which must be 'normal' since all mammals engage in it, as adolescent exploration and an inevitable consequence of young people spending time in unisexual groups 'such as boys schools' but long-term homosexuality is an 'aberrant' 'fixation'. Grudgingly he admits that 'permanent homosexuals' are 'valuable non-contributors' in the present context of the current population explosion, which he regards as a serious coming crisis (so yeah, a Malthusian too).

These regressive views on sexuality were commonplace when Morris wrote the book in 1967, but when he was invited to update it in 1994, he saw no reason to change anything but the figure he originally gave for the size of the population. Man's [sic] essential biological nature can change only over evolutionary time scales, he might say. And there's the rub. Morris is an essentialist, for whom biology is destiny. However hard we try to 'twist' and 'distort' our true nature, we will keep returning to the animal truth.

This position has generally been rejected by philosophers and social scientists, with good reason. Since zoology is a field of study undertaken by socialised humans, its premises are culturally constructed and determined. I am not trying to deny physical reality or suggest that nothing can be learned from research, but we can't seriously talk about 'facts' isolated from culture, as Morris tries to do. The simple example of his account of taste sensation is instructive. He repeats the 'fact' that we detect four tastes and the 'fact' that different parts of the tongue are sensitive to each of them. Both of these 'facts' are wrong - they are mistaken interpretations which other cultures have not shared. This reminds me of a lecture I once heard, in which we were asked to state the number of our senses. Pliny said five, and it's become a cultural commonplace, but that's all it is. Consider the sense of 'touch', in our five-sense framing made to cover hot/cold, pain, proprioception and contact detection...

Morris says that as his book is intended for popular consumption it would be silly to include references. Except on the rare occasions when he actually indicates that 'research has shown' etc, I have to assume that this book is educated speculation. His procedure is to reverse-engineer primitive humans based on a white male North American interpretation of what is observed in the species today, supplementing this with our knowledge of prehistoric environmental conditions, the famously patchy fossil record and comparisons with primates and predators. And why not? The effort is worthy and the results interesting, though I believe they have been much-contested since first published. Where Morris oversteps the mark is in attempting to apply his picture of our ancestors, gained from studying modern humans, to show us modern humans where we are going wrong. Call me culturally indoctrinated Morris, but I think that's called circular reasoning.

Morris claims that he wants us to embrace our biological nature, and poses the zoological perspective as ideologically neutral, but it's obvious that as well as homophobia, misogyny and racist imperialism, this book is drenched in the ideology of 'biological morality', the agenda of the gene. My genes regard me as an instrument for their replication, and everything else I do (and feel and think) is irrelevant to them. Their motive is identical to the motive of a virus. My glorious birthright, as a human being, is the ability to choose otherwise....more

BrokenTuneGreat review. And thanks for reminding me that this, too, is a book I once threw against a wall.
Jul 17, 2015 12:52PM

ZannaMany thanks, I'm so glad it's not just me. I updated this as I got a new snarky comment about it on Amazon this morning, but by the time I logged in tMany thanks, I'm so glad it's not just me. I updated this as I got a new snarky comment about it on Amazon this morning, but by the time I logged in to respond the author had deleted it...more
Jul 17, 2015 01:06PM

This was one of the most upsetting books I have ever read. Fifteen years of age, I approached Morris with a vague, general interest in animals, i.e. zoology. His book was popular and available in the Park Ridge public library where I read it.

Fifteen and never been kissed. Well, that is not quite true. In first grade I was kissed by Lisa. That happened in her garage up Butte Lane from our house in the Meadowdale development. It was, it is unforgettable. A willowy blonde, she wore a powder blue smThis was one of the most upsetting books I have ever read. Fifteen years of age, I approached Morris with a vague, general interest in animals, i.e. zoology. His book was popular and available in the Park Ridge public library where I read it.

Fifteen and never been kissed. Well, that is not quite true. In first grade I was kissed by Lisa. That happened in her garage up Butte Lane from our house in the Meadowdale development. It was, it is unforgettable. A willowy blonde, she wore a powder blue smock over a white shirt. Between that and her matching white knee socks there was a provocative inch or two of scuffed skin. The kiss was tender, mutual, a bare wisp of a touch--then her little brothers and sisters who had been spying on us started to snigger and it was over. A few days later Lisa and Susan Whitaker got into a fight over me at the Oak Ridge School playground. That was it. I joined George and some other guys in a girl hating organization devoted to such manly pursuits as watching old Three Stooges films on television again and again.

Nine years later and I was obsessed with girls, obsessed. Small for my age (4'11" entering high school), they were all taller and had been taller for quite some time. I had loved one of them, Nancy Stinton, from sixth through eighth grade, carrying half her books home for her daily, but nothing had happened and, indeed, it was probably just enough to see her smile, to have the twenty minute conversation after school.

But by fifteen, it was getting to be too much. The girls in junior high had already started, some of them, to date high school guys and some of those guys were six feet tall and proudly stubbled. Now I was in high school, watching couples prominade from class to class, surrounded by beautiful women, most of them older than me. God, I'd never grow up!

Yeah, an "interest in animals, in zoology" I wrote, hah!, the book said "Naked" and it had the silhouette of a nude man on the cover and a chapter entitled "Sex" and another entitled "Comfort"--that's why I read what I hoped would be an informative piece of highbrow pornography.

It was indeed informative--horribly so! Morris, as if reflecting my worst fears, seemed to relate everything, everything to sex, to sexual attraction, to reproduction of the species. Women? Everything about women was to attract and mate with men. Everything. Why do women wear high heels? Because it elevates their rumps for penetration. Why do women wear lipstick? To suggest the blood engorgement of labial arousal. And on and on and on. It was terrible. I was doomed....more

People are animals. Our behavior has evolutionary roots-- even many behaviors we define as cultural have their basis in our prehistoric dog-eat-dog, survival-of-the-sexiest past.There, that's the thesis-- perfectly sound and very interesting. The book falls apart in the details though-- sweeping generalizations and odd assumptions about sexual behavior and gender roles and cultural supremacy without any supporting proof. Just ideas and theories that seem almost comically colored by the author'sPeople are animals. Our behavior has evolutionary roots-- even many behaviors we define as cultural have their basis in our prehistoric dog-eat-dog, survival-of-the-sexiest past.There, that's the thesis-- perfectly sound and very interesting. The book falls apart in the details though-- sweeping generalizations and odd assumptions about sexual behavior and gender roles and cultural supremacy without any supporting proof. Just ideas and theories that seem almost comically colored by the author's dated biases.His ideas sometimes lean dangerously towards social Darwinism-- minority cultures with "bizarre" practices are aberrations in human evolution, and their behaviors can be dismissed as irrelevant to the discussion of human behavior. The majority's (he means White Northern Europeans, not East Asians, of course) cultural practices represent the evolutionarily successful norm. I am intrigued by the mythical, biological and prehistoric roots of human behavior-- like the story that men are silent because their prehistoric ancestors needed to hunt mastadons with stealth, while women are chatty thanks to their communal berry-gathering ancestresses. Maybe that's ridiculous-- I want to read a book that presents and backs up these theories with actual data. So, not this book....more

CNot quite. It is more that there are many who do not want to know that Morris is right in general. To many Darwinism applies to others but not to themNot quite. It is more that there are many who do not want to know that Morris is right in general. To many Darwinism applies to others but not to themselves. Since the year that the book was written there have been many examples of what he said....more
Jan 20, 2015 09:44AM

I spent a year in Marbury, a non-authoritarian school modelled on Summerhill. It was all too weird for words. Next time any of you wonder why I don't know what continent Spain is in, or why places that are further away have times that are closer or...keep in mind that my geography text book for the year was The Naked Ape.

Well, I say it was that sort of school like it's to blame for my appalling ignorance of geography. If only I'd chosen a normal school instead. But truth be told, the next yearI spent a year in Marbury, a non-authoritarian school modelled on Summerhill. It was all too weird for words. Next time any of you wonder why I don't know what continent Spain is in, or why places that are further away have times that are closer or...keep in mind that my geography text book for the year was The Naked Ape.

Well, I say it was that sort of school like it's to blame for my appalling ignorance of geography. If only I'd chosen a normal school instead. But truth be told, the next year I did chose an ordinary school - Methodist Ladies College - and blow me down if the maths teacher didn't turn out to be a girl who made us do things like write poetry. 'Your maths assignment for today is to write a poem in the style of Jabberwocky' It's moot whether my maths is worse than my geography.

Reading this book again after 37 years, I was pleasantly surprised at the relevant impact this book still has. Perhaps reading it after nearly four decades of experience as a member of its target species, more points in it seemed to ring true. There are probably some aspects of this book which have been called into question by subsequent research findings, but in general the materials on the human evolutionary biology and psychology I've read in the meantime seem to support Morris's positions.

WhReading this book again after 37 years, I was pleasantly surprised at the relevant impact this book still has. Perhaps reading it after nearly four decades of experience as a member of its target species, more points in it seemed to ring true. There are probably some aspects of this book which have been called into question by subsequent research findings, but in general the materials on the human evolutionary biology and psychology I've read in the meantime seem to support Morris's positions.

When first published, this book was considered revolutionary because it attempted to describe the species homo sapiens from an objective zoologist's perspective. The chapters on sex and rearing were shocking to some in the way they dispassionately described these aspects of human behavior. There are other sections of the book, however, that begin to spread into the fields of sociology and psychology and therefore involve human interpretation. The discussion of these topics - the evolution of religion in particular - is where this book has become somewhat obsolete, as the recent interest in human evolution has increasingly focused on the development of vastly increased intelligence and the capacity for abstract thinking. This capacity - which allows empathy and the assessment of future outcomes, and yet is limited in the acceptance of eventual non-existence (i.e., death) - has come to be seen as a major factor in human evolution, though is hardly mentioned in this book.

It is still well worth reading and shook up my assumptions about human existence once again....more

J. KeckI definitely read this while I was majoring in anthropology. Though, I made subsequent changes in majors, the impact and value of this book remained wI definitely read this while I was majoring in anthropology. Though, I made subsequent changes in majors, the impact and value of this book remained with me....more
Sep 14, 2013 03:11PM

Simon SavillI am a psychology undergraduate with a personal interest in this book because I have a hormone disorder, that reduces inhibition of thoughts and makesI am a psychology undergraduate with a personal interest in this book because I have a hormone disorder, that reduces inhibition of thoughts and makes memory less effective, that has lead me to analyse the way I think. This book links together all of the most key theories in psychology.

When I stumbled across this book last week and promptly down-loaded it to my kindle, I did not realize it had been first published in 1967. Some of the views are decidedly antiquated. For example that men go to work in attempt to satisfy the hunting urge together with other men, while women stay at home and take care of the children. In most of the Scandinavian countries, as large a percentage of women as men are now an active part of the work force. The superficial treatment of homosexuality anWhen I stumbled across this book last week and promptly down-loaded it to my kindle, I did not realize it had been first published in 1967. Some of the views are decidedly antiquated. For example that men go to work in attempt to satisfy the hunting urge together with other men, while women stay at home and take care of the children. In most of the Scandinavian countries, as large a percentage of women as men are now an active part of the work force. The superficial treatment of homosexuality and religion isn't anywhere near satisfying either. However, when this book was written, homosexuality was still considered a disease, so I presume this book calling this "aberrant" is the least that can be expected.

The theories presented here on why we are naked are exactly the same as I read in a newer publication I read recently: we lost our hair due to parasites (because less hair meant less parasites) or because we were semi-acquatic for a time being. This book draws no final conclusion on this subject.

One of the points I liked best in this book was this "When you put a name on a door, or hang a painting on a wall, you are, in dog or wolf terms, for example, simply cocking your leg on them and leaving your personal mark there". A few years ago I was feeling insecure at work and I promptly put a painting on the wall and pictures on my desk - very consciously marking my territory. Come to think of it, this is the only office I have ever felt the need to "own" in this way.

Despite being somewhat old-fashioned I enjoyed this approach to the human animal. It's not completely outdated yet and well worth reading.

Another point that made me think was this "Those members of a community who are either very successfull or socially well adjusted rarely suffer from 'grooming invitation ailments'". By this the author means minor illnesses that only just require a visit to the doctor and the care of a spouse or friends (colds, laryngitis and such). In my current work where everyone has a rather high socio-economic status, we are all startingly healthy. Before, when I held a job at the bottom-end of the hierarchy, people where ill of little things ALL the time. So maybe there is some truth in the author's statement, however controversial it may be....more

The Naked Ape is my favourite book, ever. If The Naked Ape was a person I would marry it in a heartbeat under whatever terms it wished, and I would be more than happy to give my body over to producing as many of its children as I could because a book like this deserves to bear children more than most of us do. Desmond Morris is an Anthropologist, and the person that made me decide that I, too, would like very much to be an Anthropologist, and The Naked Ape is a study of the Human Being as an aniThe Naked Ape is my favourite book, ever. If The Naked Ape was a person I would marry it in a heartbeat under whatever terms it wished, and I would be more than happy to give my body over to producing as many of its children as I could because a book like this deserves to bear children more than most of us do. Desmond Morris is an Anthropologist, and the person that made me decide that I, too, would like very much to be an Anthropologist, and The Naked Ape is a study of the Human Being as an animal. Morris writes on this topic with the same enthusiasm as anyone who has found a topic that fascinates them would, you can tell that he is intrigued and excited by Humans and all of their bizarre inner workings. Although he is a scientist and this is most easily defined as a scientific study, he writes in common language that is easy to understand, but the best part is that he has a sense of humour about it all. He is amused by people and their strangeness. Through the early stages of mental development, to gaining the ability to coordinate your limbs, power-struggles in the playground and the absolute horror and abysmal joy of adolescence to the violence and illusions of solidarity that is adulthood Desmond (we're on a first name basis because we've been intimate...in my dreams) never fails to make light of the confusion that afflicts us all and this is truly a book that has something for everyone. ...more

I don't know what sort of re-packaged edition I read originally, but it was a short, coffee-table sized hardback, with full-sized, four-colour photos of women's pupils dilating. It seems men automatically find the same photo of a woman, but with larger pupils, more attractive. I thought I'd discovered a secret key to measuring womankind, in a kind of Cosmo version of The Naked Ape. A friend in school saw my book and got very excited, but the secret knowledge within, well, that was only for me.

NoI don't know what sort of re-packaged edition I read originally, but it was a short, coffee-table sized hardback, with full-sized, four-colour photos of women's pupils dilating. It seems men automatically find the same photo of a woman, but with larger pupils, more attractive. I thought I'd discovered a secret key to measuring womankind, in a kind of Cosmo version of The Naked Ape. A friend in school saw my book and got very excited, but the secret knowledge within, well, that was only for me.

Now that I've bought a steeply discounted paperback version, without the photos, Desmond Morris had said a great deal more, in a far better style, but with details which are remarkably less believable. I'd only recently started this book: Brazzaville Beach, about chimpanzee researchers trying to hide growing suspicion of chimp cannibalism, so I was becoming slightly better informed about some of the harrier apes. According to Morris, chimpanzees are our closest genetic relatives.

Morris often repeats himself in a leisurely and comforting way, so it's indisbutable that he believes chimpanzees are largely peaceful, whereas mankind is not. Yet I wasn't surprised when, just yesterday, science magazines started discussing very high numbers of chimp-on-chimp killings, and how their fights can no longer be attributed to dwindling habitat.

The zoology/sociology in The Naked Ape is already becoming too positivistic, even for my taste. But I have to believe that Morris, as the Zoological Society's Curator of Mammals, should have known a lot more about actual apes before applying his claims to the naked ones.

Semi-final update: I'm going to admit that there are details in the chapter about sex, that if true, I did not know. It may even answer a critical question its thinking inspired. There is probably some Bulgarian demolition expert trying to pry the secrets from its shredded remains.

Original review:You really do feel like a VIP guest in a glass wall safari of human nature. Hilarious that a man who watched fish fornicate for a year is somehow your guide....more

Desmond Morris' "The Naked Ape" is not a quality book for individuals seeking to understand the nature of modern evolutionary psychology. Morris' work is notable only for being a historical perspective into the origins of a discipline which has (since his book) taken on a dynamic and vibrant academic life. If one can manage to make it past some of the glaring errors in his work (at one point he suggests that women evolved a trait because it was evolutionarily better for men - 'Uh, Desmond? EvoluDesmond Morris' "The Naked Ape" is not a quality book for individuals seeking to understand the nature of modern evolutionary psychology. Morris' work is notable only for being a historical perspective into the origins of a discipline which has (since his book) taken on a dynamic and vibrant academic life. If one can manage to make it past some of the glaring errors in his work (at one point he suggests that women evolved a trait because it was evolutionarily better for men - 'Uh, Desmond? Evolution by natural or sexual selection doesn't work like that...'), the book itself is worth reading to discover just how far the field has come in only a few short decades....more

I would have given "The Naked Ape" a 4-star rating based on its handling of human evolution and animal behavior, unfortunately 1960's style moralizing creeped in and caused me to lower my rating to a 3. The boomer generation was really annoying in how they viewed themselves as saviors to the planet when they were really just as selfish and materialistic as their parents (and less moral and responsible). Even with those reservations, the descriptions of human and animal behavior and human evolutiI would have given "The Naked Ape" a 4-star rating based on its handling of human evolution and animal behavior, unfortunately 1960's style moralizing creeped in and caused me to lower my rating to a 3. The boomer generation was really annoying in how they viewed themselves as saviors to the planet when they were really just as selfish and materialistic as their parents (and less moral and responsible). Even with those reservations, the descriptions of human and animal behavior and human evolution are very good and fresh even after 40 years on the shelf. Some of the crucial aspects of human evolution and primate behavior have been tweaked since publication. For instance, Chimpanzees do form hunting parties and meat makes up a small but important part of their diet. Also, bi-pedalism and pair-bonding seem to have developed while our primate ancestors still lived in a forest rather than as an adaptation to carnivorous savanna dwelling. ...more

One doesn't pick up this sort of book looking to 'get off' but let me tell you (!) the opening chapters on sexuality are very arousing. I had to stop reading and satisfy my er, appetite several times before moving on to the next chapters. If only to stimulate yourself without anyone catching on--or while posing as erudite or whatever-- this book is terrific.

Otherwise, sure he makes many interesting points about the biological basis for certain of our human tendencies--and I appreciate his attempOne doesn't pick up this sort of book looking to 'get off' but let me tell you (!) the opening chapters on sexuality are very arousing. I had to stop reading and satisfy my er, appetite several times before moving on to the next chapters. If only to stimulate yourself without anyone catching on--or while posing as erudite or whatever-- this book is terrific.

Otherwise, sure he makes many interesting points about the biological basis for certain of our human tendencies--and I appreciate his attempting to coherently draw a line between the biological and the cultural--but there is this creeping morality underlying much of what he talks about particularly towards the middle and end of the book that is off-putting.

Definitely something you can take into the tub and finish in an hour or so (as long as you're not counting the times you'll put it down to masturbate).

This book astonished people 40 years ago and inspired all that psuedo-scientific "men are hunters, women are gatherers" crap, or so I'm told.

It's aged badly. The author comes across as pretty full of himself -- he thinks his way of analyzing human behavior (from a zoological perspective) raises him above bias, but he's amusingly unaware of his own biases -- misogyny, homophobia, and anti-psychiatry, to name a few.

It's still got some interesting parts, I guess, but I could only make it about halThis book astonished people 40 years ago and inspired all that psuedo-scientific "men are hunters, women are gatherers" crap, or so I'm told.

It's aged badly. The author comes across as pretty full of himself -- he thinks his way of analyzing human behavior (from a zoological perspective) raises him above bias, but he's amusingly unaware of his own biases -- misogyny, homophobia, and anti-psychiatry, to name a few.

It's still got some interesting parts, I guess, but I could only make it about halfway through before I got too bored. The funny thing is that I really do think he has a good point; humans are animals and we should pay more attention to how our animal nature motivates us and affects our behavior....more

I think the concept of this approach to humans as an animal like any other is a brilliant one. We are prone to thinking of ourselves as a species apart, when we're not, and even if we were, we could do with putting back in our places sometimes -- being human doesn't mean we're more worthy than any other creature, all of which have their own adaptations to deal with the environment they find themselves in. We're particularly versatile, yes, but because we evolved that way, not because of some speI think the concept of this approach to humans as an animal like any other is a brilliant one. We are prone to thinking of ourselves as a species apart, when we're not, and even if we were, we could do with putting back in our places sometimes -- being human doesn't mean we're more worthy than any other creature, all of which have their own adaptations to deal with the environment they find themselves in. We're particularly versatile, yes, but because we evolved that way, not because of some special merit.

Anyway, while the approach is interesting, and Desmond Morris' writing is engaging, this is definitely out of date. He keeps a few too many of his human expectations kicking around, like expectations of gender roles and sexuality. It is a really old book, which explains it, and it could undoubtedly do with some updating.

If you're particularly attached to notions of humans as being sacred, set apart, etc, you won't want to read this. And if you have any sexual hangups, you won't want to read this, either -- there's a whole chapter on sex. Granted, it's a very old view of sex, considering it only in terms of adaptations (dare we whisper to Morris that homosexual behaviour could persist in a population simply because it feels good and only strict monogamy would mean that any 'gay gene' would die out?), but still, it can be fairly explicit.

I don't agree with Morris on many aspects, but his attempt to study humans as animals must be commended....more

We are very young species. We call us modern and inside us we are carrying 100 or thousand years of primitive habits with us. We've created nuclear bombs, but we can't prevent ourselves from close our eyes when a fly across our eyes. We have tremendous power and but we don't know how to use that, where to use that. We are sheep with a lion's claw. Lion knows very well the use of his dangerous claws, but sheep doesn't. He just got it overnight.

As a naked app, the nature is our very essential asseWe are very young species. We call us modern and inside us we are carrying 100 or thousand years of primitive habits with us. We've created nuclear bombs, but we can't prevent ourselves from close our eyes when a fly across our eyes. We have tremendous power and but we don't know how to use that, where to use that. We are sheep with a lion's claw. Lion knows very well the use of his dangerous claws, but sheep doesn't. He just got it overnight.

As a naked app, the nature is our very essential asset. Though we are destroying it every now and then. If there is no animal left except human, we also won't survive. Inside our modern skin, we carry 1000 years old mind and characteristics. We should slow down or we will vanish. Remember what happened to dinosaurs? ...more

A fascinating read by a great thinker. Virtually no aspect of human nature and physiognomy escapes his keen zoologist eyes; even responses such as smiling, laughing and crying. However, be warned: not only is this book nearly 50 years old and therefore outdated, but one must ingest his words with a large heaping of salt. As a scientific treatise it fails. The best way to read it is to consider this the personal musings of a biologist/anthropologist, not the findings of an expert researcher. It'sA fascinating read by a great thinker. Virtually no aspect of human nature and physiognomy escapes his keen zoologist eyes; even responses such as smiling, laughing and crying. However, be warned: not only is this book nearly 50 years old and therefore outdated, but one must ingest his words with a large heaping of salt. As a scientific treatise it fails. The best way to read it is to consider this the personal musings of a biologist/anthropologist, not the findings of an expert researcher. It's greatest value is in instigating thought on the subject. It is the step-back-and look-at-ourselves approach which is of real value here, not his (sometimes hilarious)conclusions.

His explanation of the protuberance and shape of female breasts developing as a frontal sexual display resulting from our upright posture, rather than for increased efficiency of nursing, is presented as a credible argument. Mmm, maybe that explains the human male's fascination with them.

Most of his observations are comparative, highlighting similarities and differences between other mammals, notably the chimpanzee. In all cases, Morris makes us think about many aspects of ourselves that we normally take for granted.

One criticism I have is his over-emphasis on genetic origins - for example, he claims the pair-bond formation between sexes (i.e monogamy) is genetic rather than cultural - afraid I disagree there. Also his treatment of warfare is incomplete and not entirely satisfactory for me.

I know others will attack the author as chauvinistic (not only in regards the sexes, but cultures as well), but still, hey, the book can just be considered food for thought.

All in all, a stimulating read, one so rich that I have marked it for a second time around in the future. It helped me to come up with my own thoughts on the subject...more

Studying the nature of the human race as an anthropologist would study a group of apes is as informative as it is hysterical. And the added bonus of being written with overtones of an impending Cold War made the book even more enjoyable.

The conceit of this book is to cast a zoologist's eye over the human species, reporting its behaviour as we would any other species. It can be disconcerting in places, but always interesting. The argument is that humans reveal today, irrespective of layers of reason and culture, our inherent natures as a fruit-eating, forest-dwelling social ape turned carnivorous hunter on the savanna.

On the other hand, it's not clear how much of this populist treatment is rooted in real science. All too often,The conceit of this book is to cast a zoologist's eye over the human species, reporting its behaviour as we would any other species. It can be disconcerting in places, but always interesting. The argument is that humans reveal today, irrespective of layers of reason and culture, our inherent natures as a fruit-eating, forest-dwelling social ape turned carnivorous hunter on the savanna.

On the other hand, it's not clear how much of this populist treatment is rooted in real science. All too often, there is a speculative turn of phrase: Maybe this behaviour is due to such-and-such; Maybe some other behaviour is because of this-and-that. And it seems anything can be explained when you can pick and choose from our mixed heritage (from forest and savanna). I don't mean to suggest that I necessarily disagree with the hypotheses, just that I would have liked to have seen a more evidence-based treatment. But that would have resulted in a longer and less entertaining treatment.

The book's vintage shows through too. The preoccupation with the threat of nuclear warfare, and the absence of any concern with climate change, is one mark of this....more

I suppose all reviews of this book must open up with the fact that it is dated - considerably. Many of the speculations and theories put forward in the text have since fallen out of favor or been outright dismissed. But as with all science books from an older era, this is not the important part! The questions and insights raised about human nature far outweigh any omissions due to the inadequate science of the times.

What one can find fault with is several arguments and generalizations made aboutI suppose all reviews of this book must open up with the fact that it is dated - considerably. Many of the speculations and theories put forward in the text have since fallen out of favor or been outright dismissed. But as with all science books from an older era, this is not the important part! The questions and insights raised about human nature far outweigh any omissions due to the inadequate science of the times.

What one can find fault with is several arguments and generalizations made about culture that the author roots in 'historical' evidence. During the chapter on sexual practices and habits of humans, the author essentially shrugs and assumes that pair bonding, sexual behavior, and all the quirks that we have today has always been practiced the way our parents and their parents had done it. This is untrue, as the family unit and gender roles have changed throughout history. The author ascribes changes in sexual practices and gender roles as something modern - a sign that we have outgrown our biology. This simply is not true. Our environment has changed and our biology is simply shifting into a gear not visited for generations. The idea of family planning and restricted birth is not a product of the industrial revolution, but something that can be traced back (both as a popular and detested idea depending on the environment) all the way back to ancient Egypt.

That one gripe aside, the remainder of the book succeeds in keeping major cultural biases out of its attempt to do most of us avoid: viewing human beings as an animal. While certainly not the definitive text on the subject, for someone who wants a quick introduction to a combination of human biology and anthropology, I would highly recommend this book....more

Desmond Morris raises some interesting points in this book, some more farfetched than others. Honestly, I have problems with a lot of the points he makes in this book.

Attempting to explain everything we do by comparing us to our nearest relatives in the animal kingdom is like I said interesting but the truth is many of our behaviors are unique to our species because of our advanced intellect and I think simplifying them by saying they can be explained by looking at the behaviors of other primatDesmond Morris raises some interesting points in this book, some more farfetched than others. Honestly, I have problems with a lot of the points he makes in this book.

Attempting to explain everything we do by comparing us to our nearest relatives in the animal kingdom is like I said interesting but the truth is many of our behaviors are unique to our species because of our advanced intellect and I think simplifying them by saying they can be explained by looking at the behaviors of other primates is not entirely accurate. Furthermore, he makes a few mistakes I wouldn't expect anyone familiar with biology to make (including the 'tongue-map' for taste recognition) as well as taking a very eurocentric stance on human behavior.

His postulations aren't really backed up with anything more than the observation of other primates which by itself can't really be used to explain our behavior. Along with his insistance on using North Americans and Europeans as the model for humanity, I have to say that this book is more rooted in speculation than fact and shouldn't be taken seriously as a work of science. Nonetheless, it is an entertaining read and worthy of the 3 stars I gave it....more

Fascinating reading and life affirming in an unexpected way. The most common complaint about this book is lack of evidence or proof. Morris states clearly that he did not list all the evidence because it would turn the book into an encyclopedia. There is a bibliography at the end for those who want to see where he got his information and inspiration.The style of the book is not purely scientific in so far as he he makes assumptions and draws conclusions from his own experience and his research,Fascinating reading and life affirming in an unexpected way. The most common complaint about this book is lack of evidence or proof. Morris states clearly that he did not list all the evidence because it would turn the book into an encyclopedia. There is a bibliography at the end for those who want to see where he got his information and inspiration.The style of the book is not purely scientific in so far as he he makes assumptions and draws conclusions from his own experience and his research, which makes for very interesting reading, however can be interpreted as imprecise. Just because something is not 100% proven, that does not mean that it is not interesting, relevant, thought provoking or inspirational. Throughout the book there are segments I might not wholly agree with, however the scope of the book is so vast yet still well tied together and coherent that it deserves 5/5. A brave book that even today is refreshing, educational, inspiring and a break from convention....more

I disagree with those who say this book is homophobic and/or misogynistic. Morris says some things that in normal conversational context might be dubbed as such, but his explicit purpose was to view mans behavior from an objective standpoint. He succeeds. Political correctness has no place in (even attempted) scientific writing. He DOES state that gay couples cannot procreate on their own. However he goes on to discuss scenarios where this may be a pro. Don't overreact.

When I read this book, II disagree with those who say this book is homophobic and/or misogynistic. Morris says some things that in normal conversational context might be dubbed as such, but his explicit purpose was to view mans behavior from an objective standpoint. He succeeds. Political correctness has no place in (even attempted) scientific writing. He DOES state that gay couples cannot procreate on their own. However he goes on to discuss scenarios where this may be a pro. Don't overreact.

When I read this book, I was unaware it was written decades ago. Morris' observations were fairly elementary to me, I assume since I grew up hearing a good deal of them. It is still quite enjoyable to read despite my experience. ...more

"Get your stinkin' paws off me you damned dirty ape", reading Desmond Morris' book brings new meaning to The Planet of the Apes. It is perhaps a little dated now, but the reality today is that there is still an obsession with disassociating humanity from its biology. Of course, Morris' attempts at explaining all human behaviour using exclusively "the naked ape", or prehistoric man, do fall short on some counts, but it is equally futile to try to explain human activity without looking at biology,"Get your stinkin' paws off me you damned dirty ape", reading Desmond Morris' book brings new meaning to The Planet of the Apes. It is perhaps a little dated now, but the reality today is that there is still an obsession with disassociating humanity from its biology. Of course, Morris' attempts at explaining all human behaviour using exclusively "the naked ape", or prehistoric man, do fall short on some counts, but it is equally futile to try to explain human activity without looking at biology, instinct and evolution.

Morris shows us in plain daylight that humans are an animal and that our behaviour can be explained in the same way as any other animal. It might be a difficult fact for many to accept, but The Naked Ape offers a fascinating blow-by-blow account describing cultural and social phenomena in a biological framework, albeit more convincingly on some counts as opposed to others.

The Naked Ape is an easy to read, engaging narrative that still presents a number of interesting and fascinating questions, which we can all ask ourselves and perhaps should be debated more openly in society today. ...more

“I viewed my fellow man not as a fallen angel, but as a risen ape.”
—
21 likes

“Frequently we imagine that we are behaving in a particular way because such behaviour accords with some abstract, lofty code of moral principles, when in reality all we are doing is obeying a deeply ingrained and long ‘forgotten’ set of purely imitative impressions.”
—
0 likes